are specified the old behaviour is old. The submitted applied a much cleaner
diff to ruptime.c, however it did not cover cases like listing failures. It
would probably be a good idea to move the printing from the ruptime function,
and have that function just be used to build the list, as that would unbreak
sorting, but this diff is intended to be clear, relative to the original
code. As the sort order is the order specified on the command line, for now,
such is documented in the manual page accordingly.
Submitted by: Edward J. M. Blocklesby <ejb@lythe.org.uk>
MFC after: 3 weeks
toronto up 5+18:58, 0 users, load 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
zeus up 109+13:53, 0 users, load 0.55, 0.28, 0.15
looks like:
toronto up 5+18:58, 0 users, load 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
zeus up 109+13:53, 0 users, load 0.55, 0.28, 0.15
This will make a number of things easier in the future, as well as (finally!)
avoiding the Id-smashing problem which has plagued developers for so long.
Boy, I'm glad we're not using sup anymore. This update would have been
insane otherwise.
Machine come and go...
Little patch removes lists down for over 4 days from the list.
(If you haven't noticed they are down in that period, you should
turn them off!)
Closes: PR#bin/1361
Submitted by: xaa@stack.urc.tue.nl
>Description:
A machine with uptime >1 year appears wrong in the ruptime list
Fixes bin/626: ruptime doesn't like big ...
Reviewed by:
Submitted by: root@xaa.stack.urc.tue.nl
Obtained from:
